Saturday, December 6, 2014

Before a writer for Rolling Stone ran with an alleged gang-rape story told by a student named "Jackie," she bought an alleged multiple-rape story told by a former altar boy named "Billy."

On Nov. 19th, Rolling Stone published an article claiming that "Jackie," a student at the University of Virginia, had been allegedly gang-raped by seven men at a fraternity party. ["A Rape on Campus; A Brutal Assault and Struggle for Justice At UVA."]

The fraternity was tried in the media and found guilty. Bricks were thrown through the windows of the frat house, the cops in Charlottesville were called in to investigate, and the university president shut down all fraternity and sorority events on campus.

Then, The Washington Post, citing factual discrepancies, cast doubt on the victim's story. Rolling Stone rolled over almost immediately, issuing an apology that said their trust in Jackie had been "misplaced."

There's lots of irony here folks for readers of this blog. The writer of the story in question, Rolling Stone contributing editor Sabrina Rubin Erdely, is from Philadelphia. Before she ran with Jackie's story, she fell for a story told by a former altar boy dubbed "Billy Doe" by a grand jury.

In Rolling Stone, it seems rape is bigger than rock. On Sept. 15, 2011, Erderly wrote a story for Rolling Stone that accepted as gospel Billy Doe's fantastic claims about being passed around as a rape victim among two priests and a school teacher. [The Catholic Church's Secret Sex-Crime Files.] In Erdely's defense, she, like many other members of the media, made the mistake of relying on an intellectually dishonest grand jury report containing more than 20 factual errors.

Attention Rolling Stone: if you think the factual discrepancies in Jackie's story are "deeply unsettling," wait till you read all the factual discrepancies in Billy's story, documented for the past two years on this blog. Sadly, the stakes here are a lot higher than in Virginia, where none of the alleged attackers have even been outed. In Philly, three priests and a school teacher wound up going to jail over Billy's story, which has since unraveled. One of those priests died in prison last month after he spent his last hours handcuffed to a hospital bed while suffering from untreated coronary disease.

The D.A.'s Star Witness

In the University of Virginia "gang rape" story, the media rushed in and tried and convicted the wrongdoers. When Rolling Stone issued its apology for the Jackie story, managing editor Will Dana noted that Jackie "had spoken of the assault in campus forums."

Just because a victim tells his or her story over and over again, with all the sensational details, it doesn't make it true. Especially after Jackie's friends noticed that the details were changing.

In the Erdely store about Billy Doe, the writer referred to the former altar boy as "a sweet, gentle kid with boyish good looks" who was "outgoing and well-liked" before the brutal attacks turned him into a sullen, drug-addicted loner.

In the Billy Doe case, what Erdely didn't know [or bother to find out] was that Billy had already told his story to the archdiocese, police, and a grand jury, and would subsequently retell it to two different juries in two criminal cases. And every time he told his story, the details kept changing.

In the case of the alleged University of Virginia gang rape, The Washington Post discovered that although the victim claimed she had endured three hours of rape, which supposedly left her blood-splattered and emotionally devastated, no event was held at the frat house the day of the alleged rape.

Jackie's defenders also reported that "key details of the attack" had changed over time and that they were not able to verify those details. For example, one alleged attacker belonged to a different fraternity. The fraternity also reviewed a roster of employees at the university's swimming pool where the alleged ringleader of the attacked supposedly worked. The frat discovered that the swimming pool roster did not include the frat member cited by Jackie, or anybody else who matched the physical description that Jackie gave.

But when it comes to details that keep changing or don't add up, Billy's got Jackie beat by a long shot.

In the Billy Doe's case, Billy initially claimed that he was:

-- Anally raped for five hours by one priest in the sacristy and afterwards the padre threatened to kill him.

-- Punched in the head and knocked unconscious by another priest, after which Billy came to and found himself naked and tied up with altar sashes; after which he was anally raped so brutally he supposedly bled for a week.

-- Punched in the face by a school teacher and strangled with a seat belt before he was raped in the back seat of a car.

Then, Billy dropped all those details about the anal rapes, being punched in the head and knocked unconscious, being tied up with altar sashes, getting punched in the face and strangled with a seat belt, and being threatened with death. And then he invented a whole new story about being forced to perform strip teases, oral sex and mutual masturbation with the same trio of assailants.

This was the story reported as gospel by the grand jury and Rolling Stone.

The details, however, kept changing. In the case of the school teacher, Billy gave three different locations for the alleged rape -- in the classroom, in the back seat of the teacher's car, and in a park.

You think the details in the Jackie story didn't add up? In Billy's case, the district attorney's own detectives discovered the following contradictions to the story reported by Rolling Stone:

-- Billy claimed the first priest who raped him attacked in the sacristy after an early morning Mass. His mother, however, who kept meticulous calendars chronicling the daily events of her two altar boy sons, never listed an early morning Mass for Billy to serve at during his entire fifth-grade year when the attack allegedly occurred.

-- Billy claimed the first priest attacked him as he was putting away wine in the sacristy. His older brother, however, also an altar boy and a sexton, told police [as did other witnesses including priests] that it was the duty of the sexton to put away the wine after Mass.

-- Billy claimed a second priest raped him when he was a fifth-grader putting away the bells after a bell choir concert at the church. Three of Billy's former teachers at St. Jerome's, including the church's longtime music director, however, told detectives that only eighth grade boys were allowed to become members of the bell choir maintenance crew. The reason why was simple: only eighth-grade boys were strong enough to lift 30-pound tables and carry bell cases that weighed more than 30 pounds. As a fifth-grader, Billy weighed only 63 pounds. The teachers' stories were backed up by the school's yearbooks. No fifth grader was a member of the bell choir maintenance crew, nor any sixth or seventh grader.

-- Billy claimed the two priests who raped him used the code word of "sessions" to describe their sex parties with Billy. The D.A.'s detectives, however, subsequently found a far more likely origin for the use of the word sessions when they began investigating Billy's charges in the grand jury report nearly two years later. The detectives interviewed one of Billy's former drug counselors who told them that "sessions" was the term for one-on-one and group therapies with drug addicts like Billy. As a patient at 23 different drug rehabs, Billy would have been familiar with the lingo.

-- The grand jury report claimed that two books on sex abuse found under Billy's bed proved that when he was in high school student Billy was trying to come to terms with being attacked. Billy, however, told detectives that he kept the books under his bed because they had hard covers, which he used to crush Xanax capsules on before he snorted them. When the detectives checked the covers of the books they found numerous indentations. Another student told detectives that Billy stole the book from her locker.

In the Erdely article, however, she does not mention any possible credibility issues or contradictions regarding Billy Doe, who'd been arrested six times, including one bust for possession with intent to distribute 56 bags of heroin. At the time, there was a gag order in place, so neither the defendants or their lawyers nor any prosecutors are interviewed in the story. The author, however, quotes a former priest, a former seminarian who got kicked out for disciplinary reasons, a former monk who treats abuser priests, a victim of sex abuse and a couple of former prosecutors, all of whom took turns teeing off on the church. It's completely one-sided.

The story dwells on Lynn, the archdiocese's former secretary for the clergy, whom an appeals court would eventually decide should have never been charged with the crime of endangering the welfare of a child, because the law didn't apply to him. It's a conclusion that a previous district attorney, Lynne Abraham, and a previous grand jury came to in 2005 and put it in writing, but Rolling Stone doesn't bother examining the issue that would ultimately spring Lynn from jail. The monsignor remains on house arrest and has to wear an electronic ankle bracelet while the state Supreme Court decides whether to uphold the reversal of his conviction, or send him back to jail.

In the Rolling Stone article, Erdely repeatedly quoted from the secret archive files formerly kept by the Archdiocese of Philadelphia in a locked safe. The files, pried loose with search warrants, chronicled the secret history of four decades of sex abuse in the archdiocese involving 169 abuser priests and hundreds of child victims.

Those files repeatedly describe persistent patterns of grooming behavior by predator priests, who often plied future victims with gifts, attention and special privileges. Grooming behavior, however, is entirely absent from Billy's stories.

In the secret archive files, patient predators spent years building up trusting relationships with their victims, and often, parents or relatives, so they can gain access to the victims. In the Billy Doe story, however, three predators who have no relationship with Billy or his family strike without warning.

In short, Billy's crazy stories defied logic, common sense, all the evidence gathered by the D.A.'s own detectives, and established patterns of abuse as laid out in the secret archive files. They were also riddled with endless contradictions. Yet, since Billy's story fit a pervasive media stereotype, innocent victims being victimized by predator priests, it was fit to print.

Erdely did not respond to an email to her website seeking comment.

For more on my adventures trying to wake up the rest of the media about the Billy Doe story read this.

73
comments:

We must track, report, and expose all lies regardless of political spectrum. Don't let this be a left vs right issue, it's a 'Fourth Estate' issue. I don't care if it's Fox or NBC, I want the truth, not a facsimile of it, reported.

You're a douche, aren't you? "Twas." You actually said that, you moron. Holy crap you're pathetic.While the left is sometimes quick to believe the stories of false victims, the right is quick to deny any and all assistance to real ones.

Both right and left will ignore, or even applaud, shoddy journalism as long as it promotes the cause célèbre. This is unacceptable no matter the political leaning.

Don't ever forget that victim complex exists regardless of political ideology. Don't forget that manipulation of evidence exists in both. Realize that neither can be excused and both should be judged harshly.

Only by applying the standard fairly, equally, can we enforce the high standards required.

It really doesn't matter whether an issue has to do with the agenda of the political "right" or "left." What matters is that Erdely seems to be incapable of fact checking her stories and needs to be held accountable for the damage she has caused to individuals and institutions. Then she needs to find a new career.

Left/right does matter though, because leftist journalists are far more likely to engage in this type of behavior, because they often maintain that the narrative is far more important than specific facts. We saw the same thing in Ferguson, and the Garner case. The left mainly jumped on Ferguson, because it apeared to fit their narrative, and refused to back off even after the facts went south. But the right, wile correctly pushing back of Ferguson, joined in questioning police misconduct in the Garner case, because there the facts supported the allegations much better. Basically to much of the left, a good narrative matters more than facts.

Hi Mr. Cipriano,What culpability, if any, do Rolling Stone and Sabrina Rubin Erdely, have in the condemnation of these priests and the teacher?Am I correct that Erdely reported on this well after the fact of "Billy" telling his tales, but before their trial?

And Father Lynn was the main villain in Erdely's piece, but he has since had his conviction overturned, but remains on house arrest pending appeal by prosecutors, yes?

Lynn, as the courts have said, and a former district attorney and a previous grand jury, should have never been charged. Our local DA has gotten away with this for years. He also has stonewalled all questions for the past two years and nobody else in the media has called him on it.

When I mentioned culpability, I meant legal, moral...in all senses of the word. Or do you see them as mainly victims of Billy?

With the "Jackie" story, there is considerable debate on the culpability to assign to Jackie, Erdely, and Rolling Stone. Or if it is even too soon to be apportioning guilt. Thankfully, no particular individuals were named or jailed.

Add a widely read magazine to the list of "conspirators" responsible for sending two pedophile... er, "saintly" priests (along with their enabler within the hierarchy of the Catholic "Church") to prison. Magazines, the DA's office, members of the jury, the media, feminists, trial lawyers, etc., etc., etc... The whole world is involved in this massive conspiracy! I'll bet the "Kenyan anti-American, socialist" was in on the conspiracy, too! They might even be involved in the death of that true "Man of God," Cardinal Bevelacqua, who now certainly sits right next to Jesus for all of the "good deeds" he accomplished for the one "true faith" in Philadelphia. Better look in to that right away!

Not as "degrading" as defending convicted serial child sexual abusers (more sainted "Men of God") and their enablers within the hierarchy of the Catholic "Church" by claiming they were victims of an ever growing conspiracy involving more and more people...

Inconsistencies don't mean lies. I say this as someone who specialises in such things. For example if a child is abused numerous times the date, place can change as that's how memory works. What is telling is if the details of the act always remain the same, the feelings then that usually indicates truth telling. If something horrific happens repeatedly they can merge or blank certain parts. It's very important to point out small inconsistencies don't mean lies. Obviously something like saying you were anally raped then saying you weren't is not a small inconsistency.

But this is one case, one rare case. Most accusations are true and struggle to be believed. So I think it's needed to point that out. One lie tarnishes many many real victims and it's always good to state that to stop further suffering. This is a minority

Why women? What's that got to do with anything? That obviously accounts to both male and female victims. Wait till something happened to you and no one believes you then put your two cents in. 'Some estimates' great source..It's the opposite most cases go uncalled out of shame and fear of disbelief.

No, it's a fact. Anyone that's had anything to do with abuse survivors knows this. Sexual abuse ruins peoples lives forever. But hey go ignore that fact if it suits your argument and let lots of people who are telling the truth suffer even more.

Sex abuse does NOT ruin people's lives forever! I've seen victims of the most brutal forms of abuse rise far above the ashes. I've also seen victims of more menial forms of abuse that -choose- to hang on to their victim mentality and wallow in the muck. I am a survivor of sexual abuse, some of the people closest to me are survivors of sexual abuse, and I believe that Billy is a lying sack of shit.

The Left does not value the truth. Indeed there is no "truth" for them. There is only the narrative that destroys whatever stands in their way. The American Left has no shame and couldn't care less about who gets hurt. The ends justifies the means for them and the ends is a soul-crushing Marxist dictatorship.

Here we go... Now the entire "American Left" (whatever that means...) is involved in the conspiracy. Two pedophile Catholic priests ("Men of God") were found guilty of sexually abusing innocent children by a jury of their peers. Their enabler within the hierarchy of the Catholic "Church" (yet another "Man of God") was found guilty of endangering innocent children by shuffling the pedophile priests from location to location so they could abuse even more innocent children, again by a jury of his peers. The conviction of these criminals MUST surely signal the onset of a "soul-crushing Marxist dictatorship." The two pedophile priests and their enabler were the last bastion of defense against this Marxixt dictatorship, and they were done in by a conspiracy so massive that almost everyone in America was involved in it.

I'm not too sure of your timeline or the role of WaPo as good guys here. I was reading about this fraud in the so-called Rightwing Media before it was ever in any of the bigs. Recall also the ritual child abuse 'scandal' of some twenty years ago where at least the 'victims' had the excuse of being very young children who were guided by malicious social workers. There are still people in jail over that one. Rolling Stone gave similar credulous treatment to alumni of Guantanamo Bay. Why the 'journalist' they gave the most access to, by far, was one from this rag is a good question for the brass in charge. Maybe they remembered fondly an issue devoted to Bob Marley or Sid Vicious. But if these champions of underdogs, especially those raped by powerful authority figures, really need something to fill their time there is a notorious rapist running around out there free of legal consequences or even general knowledge of his crimes. That sack or rat sputum is named Bill Clinton, a one man raping crew that ravaged the hapless across the nation (and probably the globe). With every appearance of Cosby's victims in the press you can bet a chill washes over the Arkansas Traveler. I wonder why no one is after HIS scalp. Well, no I don't. Forward.

Dear Anonymous (Dec. 07. at 7:53 am)A while ago, I had also pointed out that 2 these men were convicted by a jury of their peers. The very simple answer I got was: "No. It was a jury of corrupt peers.") So how do you even begin to debate this issue? I figured that If you disagree, they cut you down to size immediately. They NEVER want to look at the other side even if it gives them some food for thought. I have no stake in either side, but they sure do. there You will never win anything posting against this case. They all refused to listen. This is a very, very biased blog.

A Devil's advocate is a good thing. The troll up thread did nothing to enlighten except possibly illuminate why these guys are in prison while the Duke Lacrosse players are not. Wasn't Nifong disbarred?

Devil's advocate question: those tales of being tied with altar sashes and all... Yeah, they top even "Jackie's" ridiculous tale, but we're they central to why they went to prison? This sounds like the Daycare ritual sex abuse scare across America that sent quite a few people to prison.

I know. The jury was "corrupt." The DA's office was "corrupt." The media was "corrupt." The "conspiracy of corruption" grows larger and larger by the day. Now the entire "American Left" is part of the "corruption." The same people who whine the loudest about "Billy Doe" are strangely silent when it comes to the actions of Msr. Lynn (shuffling pedophile priests around from one spot to another, enabling them to sexually abuse more and more innocent children) and the "saintly" Cardinal Bevelacqua (concealed evidence concerning the many pedophile priests he knew were sexually abusing innocent children on his watch). There was corruption, alright... right in the halls of the hierarchy of the Catholic "Church," spearheaded by the very "Men of God" that were supposed to be protecting the most vunerable of the "flock." You are right about one thing, they will never look at the other side because doing so might force them to face some very disturbing facts about their religious organization and the leaders who piously claim to be acting on behalf of God while hiding the crimes of pedophile priests and destroying the souls of countless innocent children.

but Bevilacqua's conduct doesn't make this accuser's story true which it isn't....in therapy, he started accusing his neighbor's first, told those same rehab counselors his only brother (now a lawyer) was arrested not once but twice, amongst other accusations ...he then shifted his stories to the stories he told of the alleged abuse at the hands of the priests and the teacher while an altar boy at St. Jerome's....there were several different versions of those assaults told between January 30th 2009 til now with more to come at the upcoming civil trial...his recantment for the original story of the 5 hourlong assault after an early weekday mass as told to the Archdiocesan social workers in January 2009 in court back in January 2013 is the infamous line"in that transcript

I DON"T REMEMBER< I DON"T REMEMBER I DON"T REMEMBER....

the only truthful item above is that he was actually an altar boy while he was at St Jerome's school, everything else spouted by Danny Gallagher or billy doe as the court would prefer you call him these past 70 1/2 months is a fabrication......

Right. Bevelacqua's conduct doesn't matter... Lynn's conduct doesn't matter... The conduct of the two convicted pedophile priests doesn't matter... The verdict of a jury of the pedophile priests peers doesn't matter... The only thing that matters is your point of view concerning "Billy Doe." Nothing matters except what YOU say matters. Well, the verdict of the jury matters. Just because the verdict was one that you disagreed with doesn't make it any less binding. Here's another truth that you might want to add to your list. Two pedophile priests were convicted of terrible crimes by a jury of their peers, who sat through the presentation of the evidence, weighed that evidence, and came to a verdict.

So the infallible jury in the Lynn case convicted him of violating a law that three appellate judges, a former district attorney named Lynne Abraham [a former judge herself] and a grand jury all said in writing didn't apply to him.

And the infallible jury in the Engelhardt-Shero case convicted Engelhardt of conspiring with Ed Avery to abuse Billy Doe, a conviction that even the judge in a case where the defendants were being railroaded had to throw out because there was not a scintilla of evidence to substantiate it.

I never said juries were infallible, merely that I will take the decision of a jury that heard the evidence presented to it, weighed that evidence, and deliberated to reach a verdict, over a courtroom spectator or group of spectators who did not. Too bad you lost your "pre-conceptions" at the trial. How sad for you. Unless you were somehow present when the sexual abuse of innocent children occured (or did not occur), you have no way of knowing for sure who got what wrong. You have only your opinion, no matter how righteous you believe yourself (or your opinion) to be, it is not a substitute for a trial which resulted in a conviction. As for the past, present, or future decisions by appeals courts, I accept them, whatever they are. The State will re-try those cases or they will not, I also accept those decisions, whatever they are. Refresh my memory, isn't Ed Avery the exemplary "Man of God" who plead guilty(!) to the charges against him in order to receive a light sentence. Or was he the exemplary "Man of God" who attempted suicide upon learning that a case might be made against him?

and where are the jurors who participated in the second trial. Almost always in a high profile case one or two will make a statement and get their 15 minutes of fame. yet all 12 have remained silent for the last two years. was there an agreement to remain silent between the jurors?

Maybe there is a yet another conspiracy... this time by members of the jury. They haven't publicly commented so this surely indicates they are guilty of... something, anything. We already KNOW they were corrupt and conspired to send two priests who were "just like Jesus" to prison...

A nice jewish anarchist.Seems that lots of jewish people, men and women are heavily involved in this democrat conspiracy to turn america on it's head.This lady should be sued for every dime she hasn't even made yet.

Gracious, I voted for a genuine Socialist party member in the last election (among others). Its not a Left-Right issue.

Look, if tales anything like the above, ritualistic sex abuse (were there incantations and incense, too?) are why these men are in prison, this is so far down Goody Martha Coakley territory, nothing else matters.

Just look at that picture of the DA.s star witness andit says a thousand words most that i rather not repeat but one that comes to mind Jerrrrrrk off pretty much says it all and Seth lost his character and Integrity for this con artist Junkie . U got played Seth hope it was worth it.

Mr. Cipriano,Googled you a bit. You seen like a tough, no-nonsense, streetwise kind of guy. I trust you on this. An article about your subpoena made clearer to me that Billy really is central. Mostly looking at tweets, but also some articles, from Sabrina Eardely and other reporters, I have yet to see Billy, or "victim" mentioned in the past year, at least that I saw. In other words, Billy doesn't seem central to them. This was behind my questions earlier, this discrepancy.

Sabrina Rubin Erdely, Pennsylvania '94, staff of The Daily Pennsylvania with Steven Glass. That was the culture. Insular. Glass was the top editor, like his roommate Matt the year before, like his girlfriend Jordana Horn afterwards, then Charlie, etc. Sabrina on the weekly culture magazine side.

To Anonymous@12/7 at 3:56pm,You get it! Why won't the others give at least a little thought about things like : the whole jury was corrupt, as were the Judge, and the DA, and the ignorant statement that the victim's picture makes him look guilty, people being pissed that the Inquirer and so many other papers won't follow this case (but if they do, and it doesn't agree with the opinion here - I guess that paper gets trashed also.)

Statement from a person who does know the facts of the cases or was in the courtroom for the preliminary hearings and trials. your knowledge is taken directly from the local media in their reporting where all associated parties were guilty before the judicial system started in the eyes of everyone.

Billy Doe is not the only person whose reputation is ruined, but also Bill Cosby and the fraternity pictured in the Rolling Stone article. Even worse is that everybody who read the story will think that all male fraternities are dens of sexual debauchery to women whether they are willing or not. Now we can add to the list Sabrina Rubin Erdely who for all practical purpose has written her last page as nobody will ever believe what she writes about.

"In the Rolling Stone article, Erdely repeatedly quoted from the secret archive files formerly kept by the Archdiocese of Philadelphia in a locked safe. The files, pried loose with search warrants, chronicled the secret history of four decades of sex abuse in the archdiocese involving 169 abuser priests and hundreds of child victims."There seems to have been some truth in there somewhere. She exposed the real villains.

Yet another protrayal of two convicted pedophile priests as "just like Jesus" because they, like Jesus, were convicted by a jury of their peers. I'm sure Cardinal Bevelacqua and Msr. Lynn are "just like Jesus," also. After all, weren't these upstanding "Men of God" persecuted by an "angry mob" for hiding the truth about the pedophile priests under their jurisdiction... er, I meant to say for their display of "Christian virtues," just like Jesus?

"One of those priests died in prison last month after he spent his last hours handcuffed to a hospital bed while suffering from untreated coronary disease."

Untreated coronary disease ? Maybe he was not believed by his jailers the same way Billy or this young lady is not believed here, or maybe the doctors, nurses, and the rest of the hospital staff is corrupt.

Excuse me, the "priest" has a name, it is Father Engelhardt. He wasn't hidden as Father Doe like Dan Gallagher was Billy Doe during this fiasco. The hospital/doctors do not get reimbursement for inmates like those who are employed with insurance or with Obama care, therefore Father was shipped out when he knowingly needed open heart surgery. Know the facts before commenting.

I think the proper word that should be referred to as respects the hospital care given to this deceased priest is "negligent.

Bottom line, he was laid to rest as an ordained priest, unwilling to confess to those allegations of assault of Danny Gallagher from the day he was first accused since those accusations by that drug addict were, simply untrue.....anonymous 8:11PM did I offend your intelligence by calling danny a "drug addict" or would "pathological liar" be more appropriate

He was also "laid to rest" as a convicted pedophile, certainly not the first pedophile to be laid to rest as an ordained priest. In fact, it seems to be standard operating proceedure to bury ordained pedophile priest with "honors" in the Catholic "Church." It is ludicrous (and laughable!) to say this convicted pedophile was left to die because "doctors do not get reimbursement for inmates..." Tell me, were these doctors part of the "grand conspiracy" against this "just like Jesus" priest?

Listened to your interview with Ed Morrissey... I can't believe what I heard at the end! I searched afterward on Twitter and found a sole person who mentioned it in the context of not trusting erdely on UVa story as she hasn't disclosed her conflict of interest when it came to Billy Doe and her husband. Back on December 3rd, I believe.

Ralph continue ur work on this story and hopefully somebody in the DA.s office will speak up. As for the Supreme Court changing a wrong here if they do it will open a investigation into Seth and his office on why this went to court in the first place with Billy doe the Junkie

Thoughtful commentary welcome. Trolling, harassing, and defaming not welcome. Consistent with 47 U.S.C. 230, we have the right to delete without warning any comments we believe are obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected.